The top video destination online is
YouTube by a large margin – other video watching sites like Hulu
are much further behind YouTube in the number of users. YouTube is
constantly working to improve its service to keep its edge and help
bring in more advertisers.

YouTube already showcased
HTML5-based video player demo, but the video site reports that users
have been asking it to do more with HTML5. To give the viewers what
they want, YouTube has announced a new experimental HTML5 supported
video player.

YouTube engineers wrote on the official
YouTube blog, "HTML5 is a new web standard that is gaining
popularity rapidly and adds many new features to your web experience.
Most notably for YouTube users, HTML5 includes support for video and
audio playback. This means that users with an HTML5 compatible
browser, and support for the proper audio and video codecs can watch
a video without needing to download a browser plugin."

There
are a few caveats to the experimental player right now. The biggest
is that there are a relative few browsers that support HTML5 at this
time. YouTube lists Chrome, Safari, and Internet Explorer running
ChromeFrame as being compatible. The capabilities will be expanded
later to include new capabilities. The new video player can be used
by visiting TestTube
if your browser is compatible. Other issues include the lack of
support for videos with ads, captions, or annotations.

Comments

Threshold

Username

Password

remember me

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

quote: Im really dissapointed by this.Seems Google is being anti-mozilla because Chrome is listed as supported.

Bit of a stretch. Google had their own ideas about which codecs HTML5 video should support, and designed their browser accordingly. Is it a big surprise that, when they decided to do a beta test of HTML5 video, they went with the codec they chose to support originally?

The Mozilla makers had their own choice to make, and you could expect them to do the same if they had a video sharing site.

Personally, I like Mozilla's decision better for licensing sake, but Google's better for quality's sake. Ideally, in the future, sites will support both codecs, so if you have a licensed codec you can get the best quality, and if you don't, you can get 90% of that quality. Also, here's hoping Theora improves.